Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;bryantallard, post: 3080839, member: 26727&quot;][USER=46237]@Jaelus[/USER] [USER=73983]@jtlee321[/USER] so... I was passing on the info that you guys had mentioned, and either I got it wrong, or someone has a different opinion. the OP was LC prison cent (die clash) and they called it an error and I said an error is with the coin itself and a variety has to do with the die transferring said anomaly to each coin it strikes. (more or less) right? so they responded &quot;<a href="https://www.facebook.com/jallengomez?fref=gc&amp;dti=152134261633651" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.facebook.com/jallengomez?fref=gc&amp;dti=152134261633651" rel="nofollow">Jody Gomez</a> <a href="https://www.facebook.com/bry.all.5?fref=gc&amp;dti=152134261633651&amp;hc_location=ufi" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.facebook.com/bry.all.5?fref=gc&amp;dti=152134261633651&amp;hc_location=ufi" rel="nofollow">Bry All</a> In the purest terms, a die clash is considered at best an error and not a variety, and for minor clashes it could even be chalked up to normal operation in much the same way die polish marks are not considered errors. The term variety is commonly used in the error community to denote a design aberration that happened during the creation of the die, whereas errors are considered to be anything that occurs due to a mishap during the striking of coins and falls outside normal wear and tear. While there are areas of disagreement with some anomalies that happen with coins, I do not know of a single error or variety expert who would consider a die clash a variety. From the pioneer Arnold Margolis, to the foremost modern experts such as Fred Weinberg, Mike Diamond, and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ken.potter.92?fref=gc&amp;dti=152134261633651&amp;hc_location=ufi" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.facebook.com/ken.potter.92?fref=gc&amp;dti=152134261633651&amp;hc_location=ufi" rel="nofollow">Ken Potter</a>, they do not refer to clash marks as varieties.&quot; </p><p><br /></p><p>when I looked up die variety this is what NGC has listed and I showed them &quot;here is what NGC says... &quot;A variety is a coin that has characteristics specific to the die pair that struck it. Most collectible varieties can thus be traced to a set of dies.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>their response to that... &quot;I haven&#039;t read the article, but I can tell you that NGC needs to reevaluate their description from the get-go. A variety has nothing to do with the &quot;die pair&quot;, only the single die which shows the variety. As a matter of fact, it&#039;s not uncommon at all for the opposing die(especially if it is the anvil die) to be switched out separately from the other die, sometimes multiple times during the life of the variety die. Die pairs are not permanently mated, and other than die markers for staging, the other die has no relevance to a variety. I&#039;m telling you what every error/variety expert that I know of both currently and historically considers a variety. Notice that Error-ref does not list clashes under die varieties, but rather die errors. You can find people who come up with different definitions all day long on the internet, but I&#039;m telling you what the experts in the field of errors and varieties consider.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>I a SO confused...[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in